City of Puyallup. Parks Impact Fee Study

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "City of Puyallup. Parks Impact Fee Study"

Transcription

1 City of Puyallup Parks Impact Fee Study August 23, 2005 Prepared by Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc th Avenue NE, Suite 300 Redmond, WA tel: (425) fax: (425)

2 August 24, 2005 Mr. Scott McCarty Finance Director City of Puyallup 218 West Pioneer Puyallup, WA Subject: Parks Impact Fee Study Dear Mr. McCarty: Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc. (FCS Group) is pleased to submit this Parks Impact Fee Study report for the City of Puyallup. The attached report provides the study objectives, methodology, and resulting calculations. Based on the direction given by the City Council and information provided by City staff, the calculated legal maximum parks impact fee per dwelling unit is $3,675. Appendix A of the report includes the detailed spreadsheets supporting the study results. Two issue papers discussing impact fee calculation methodologies and differentiation of impact fees between customer-classes are also included in Appendix B. We greatly appreciate the efforts and support of City staff throughout the study process. They were invaluable in developing and refining the analysis and results. It has been a pleasure working with you on this effort and we hope to be of service to the City of Puyallup in the future. Please feel free to contact either of us if you have any questions about this information. Sincerely, John Ghilarducci Principal-in-Charge Nihat Dogan Project Consultant FINANCIAL CONSULTING SOLUTIONS GROUP, INC TH AVE NE! SUITE 300! REDMOND, WA 98052! (425) ! FAX (425)

3 Parks Impact Fee Study City of Puyallup, Washington Final Report TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Project Approach...1 II. Impact Fees and Calculation Methodology...2 A. Determining the Customer Base...2 B. Determining the Cost Basis...3 C. Calculating Impact Fees...3 III. Parks Impact Fees for the City of Puyallup...4 A. Projected Growth and Density per Dwelling Unit...4 B. Impact Fee Cost Basis Level of Service Standards for Parks, Recreation and Open Space Unit Costs for Parks and facilities, and Total Cost Basis for the Parks Impact Fees Grants and Other Revenue Adjustments to the Cost Basis...6 C. Impact Fee Calculation...6 IV. Comparison with Neighboring Jurisdictions...8 Technical Appendices Analysis spreadsheets...appendix A Issue Paper 1: Impact Fee Calculation Methodologies... Appendix B Issue Paper 2: Differentiation of Impact Fees Between Customer Classes... Appendix B Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc

4 Parks Impact Fee Study City of Puyallup, Washington Final Report I. PROJECT APPROACH The City s general objective for the study was to establish a legally defensible parks impact fee, supported by the recently completed Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan Update (2002). To meet this objective, a study task plan was developed that consisted of the following major tasks Task 1: Collect and Review Data Provide a data needs list to the City. Meet with the City to review initial data, discuss policy objectives, and kickoff the study. Task 2: Establish Legal / Policy Framework Meet with City staff to identify key legal and policy issues to address as part of the study, perhaps to include the following:! Legal constraints of impact fee law;! Determining the growth share of planned improvements;! Determine the best charge basis to use in terms of equity and ease of administration. Write issue papers analyzing each issue (up to four issues), presenting alternative solutions, and recommending a course of action. Incorporate information from other, comparable Washington cities. Meet with City staff / stakeholders up to two times to discuss each issue and arrive at a cohesive recommendation for proceeding. Compile recommendations into a policy framework for the fee analysis, based on City objectives. Task 3: Develop and Complete Technical Analyses Set up a spreadsheet model, based on the recommended charge structure(s) from Task 2. Meet with City staff to refine calculation inputs, such as customer data, and project costs and allocations. Calculate the impact fee(s), as allowed and applicable, from information on the cost of planned facilities. Apply the methodology recommended in Task 2. Task 4: Presentations Prepare for and attend up to two meetings of the City Council/public. Task 5: Documentation Prepare a draft report for review by the City. Complete and provide a final report integrating City review comments. Prepare a draft ordinance reflecting the recommended fee and fee structure. Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc Page 1

5 Parks Impact Fee Study City of Puyallup, Washington Final Report II. IMPACT FEES AND CALCULATION METHODOLOGY The Growth Management Act grants counties and cities the authority to assess parks impact fees on new development. There are generally two methods of determining impact fees: the standards-driven approach and the improvements-driven approach. The standards-driven method uses the adopted standards (for parks usually expressed as acres, miles, number of playfields, etc. per 1,000 population) to arrive at the need for additional park space and facilities (as a unit cost) to serve each increment of growth. The improvements-driven method starts with a list of planned projects and requires the identification of specific growth-related portions of those planned projects. The sum total of growth-related project costs, with adjustments, becomes the impact fee basis under the improvements-driven approach. FCS Group prepared a preliminary analysis of parks impact fees for the City using readily available data under both methodologies. FCS Group also prepared an issue paper briefly discussing the key characteristics, and pros and cons of each methodology. To supplement that information, the Firm also surveyed the methodologies used by neighboring jurisdictions that charge parks impact fees. This issue paper is presented in Appendix B. After review of the preliminary analyses, the issue paper and the survey results, City Council decided to proceed using the standards-driven approach, also consistent with the City s existing methodology. A) Determining the Customer Base According to Washington law (RCW ), impact fees (a) can be imposed for system improvements that are reasonably related to the new development; (b) can not exceed a proportionate share of the costs of system improvements that are reasonably related to the new development, and (c) should be used for system improvements that will reasonably benefit the new development. RCW further dictates that impact fee receipts should be earmarked specifically and retained in special interest-bearing accounts, and should be expended or encumbered for a permissible use within 6 (six) years of receipt. Therefore, projected growth over a 6-year time frame constitutes the basis for the impact fee calculation. Under the standards-based approach, parks impact fees are initially calculated on a per capita basis. These impact fee unit costs theoretically represent the amount of capital spending required to serve one additional City resident. Impact fees are collected on a per dwelling unit basis. The calculated per capita impact fee may be converted into a per dwelling unit fee using an assumed average number of occupants per dwelling unit. This information is readily available for City residences of all types. The City of Puyallup s current fee schedule has three fee classes: single-family residential, multi-family residential, and mobile/manufactured home. The City considered arguments for and against continuing these distinctions. A uniform fee for all residential dwelling units would reflect the assumption that there is no significant difference between a single-family and a multi-family Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc Page 2

6 Parks Impact Fee Study City of Puyallup, Washington Final Report dwelling unit in terms of its additional need for parks and open space, despite differences in the average numbers of occupants per dwelling. City Council ultimately determined not to distinguish between single-family and multi-family dwelling units, and treat mobile homes as single-family residences. The issue paper examining this question is included in Appendix B. B) Determining the Cost Basis In the standards-driven approach, new development (growth) is presumably expected to pay for the parks and facilities needed to meet the City s adopted level of service standards. Using the adopted standards and growth projections, it is relatively easy to calculate the additional demand for public parks and open space needed to accommodate the projected new residential growth. A critical piece of information needed to arrive at the total cost basis for parks impact fees is the estimated unit cost for each type of public park and facility. Once the unit cost estimates are generated, calculation of parks impact fees is a straightforward exercise. It is important to note that standards-driven impact fees carry the implication that the City s existing parks meet its standards for the existing population. If that is not the case, then the City must include projects in its Plan that will correct its existing deficiency, or ensure that its impact fees do not hold new development to a higher standard than it is in itself meeting. City staff reviewed the City s capital facilities plan to address this issue. RCW requires that an adjustment to the cost of the public facilities for past and future payments made or reasonably anticipated to be made by new development to pay for particular system improvements in the form of user fees, debt service payments, taxes, or other payments earmarked for or proratable to the particular system improvement must be made to the total cost basis. Therefore, additional funding sources such as sales tax revenues, transfers from the general fund, cash balances from previous impact fee collections, grants, etc. must be prorated between the existing population and projected growth. To avoid double charging growth s proportionate share of these projected funding sources must be deducted from the fee cost basis. C) Calculating Impact Fees The impact fee is calculated as the net cost basis divided by forecasted population growth. The result, the per capita impact fee, is then converted to the impact fee per residential dwelling unit using the assumed average number of occupants per dwelling unit. Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc Page 3

7 Parks Impact Fee Study City of Puyallup, Washington Final Report III. PARKS IMPACT FEES FOR THE CITY OF PUYALLUP A. Projected Growth and Density per Dwelling Unit According to the U.S. Census, Puyallup s population was 33,011 in The City s most recent Buildable Land Report population allocation indicates that the City s population is expected to be 50,100 in Assuming a constant growth rate over the timeframe, the City s annual population growth rate is estimated to be around 1.9%. At this growth rate, estimated population is 35,690 and 39,962 in 2004 and 2010, respectively. These population projections and annual growth rate estimates are similar to earlier estimates that were used in the Parks Plan Update as the basis for the demand and need assessment. These population estimates indicate a 4,272-person population growth in the next 6 years (i.e ). This growth equates to an approximately 11.97% increase in the estimated 2004 City population. The most recent estimates of the Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM) show the average number of occupants per dwelling unit as follows: Exhibit 1: Assumed Per Unit Occupancies Per Unit Occupancy Single Family Residential Multi Family Residential (per unit) persons persons Using the OFM s estimates and the City s existing inventory of number of single family and multi family residential units, we estimated the weighted average number of persons per unit to be persons for uniform impact fee calculation. B. Impact Fee Cost Basis 1. Level of Service Standards for Parks, Recreation and Open Space The City s Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan Update (2002) included a demand and needs analysis based on the proposed level of service standards established in the same plan. Upon further review of these standards, City staff determined that the standards used in the 2002 Parks Plan were not reflective of the City s demographics, needs, and future parks development plans. The adopted and revised (recommended) standards are as follows (Exhibit 2): 1 City of Puyallup s Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan Update dated April 2002 Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc Page 4

8 Parks Impact Fee Study City of Puyallup, Washington Final Report Activity / Facility A. Parks Exhibit 2: Adopted and Recommended Level of Service Standards Adopted Level of Service Recommended Level of Service Neighborhood Park 1 acre per 1,000 population 1 acre per 1,500 population Community Park 5 acre per 1,000 population B. Trails Multi-use Trail 0.15 mile per 1,000 population C. Facilities Baseball Field 1 field per 6,000 population 1 field per 12,000 population Youth Ballfield 1 field per 2,000 population 1 field per 5,000 population Softball Field 1 field per 3,000 population 1 field per 7,000 population Soccer Field 1 field per 5,000 population Tennis Court 1 court per 2,000 population 1 court per 5,000 population Football Field Indoor Pool Gymnasium Children s Play Structures 1 field per 20,000 population 1 pool per 20,000 population 1 gymnasium per 5,000 pop. 1 play structure per 2,000 pop. FCS Group calculated parks impact fees using the recommended standards. Football field and indoor pool standards were excluded from the impact fee cost basis, since the City is not planning to build more of these facilities in the near future. City staff determined that the exclusion of these two types of facilities would more accurately reflect the needs of the citizens. 2. Unit Costs for Parks and Facilities, and Total Cost Basis for the Parks Impact Fees To arrive at the total cost of parks and open space facilities needed to accommodate projected growth, an estimate of the average cost of each facility type is needed. City staff provided the unit cost estimates presented in Exhibit 3 below. Using the number of parks facilities needed to meet the revised standards for growth over the next six years and the unit cost estimates, the total cost of the growth was calculated. Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc Page 5

9 Parks Impact Fee Study City of Puyallup, Washington Final Report Exhibit 3: Unit and Total Costs for Required Parks and Facilities Estimated Activity / Facility Requirement Total Cost Unit Costs [*] A. Parks Neighborhood Park $195, acres $555,744 Community Park $241, acres $5,150,564 B. Trails Multi-use Trail $525, mile $336,830 C. Facilities Baseball Field $705, field $251,263 Youth Ballfield $504, field $431,396 Softball Field $504, field $308,140 Soccer Field $394, field $337,355 Tennis Court $34, court $29,475 Gymnasium $920, gymnasium $785,987 Children s Play Structures $40, play structures $85,433 TOTAL $8,272,186 [*] Estimated unit costs include land acquisition, design, construction and development of parks and facilities. 3. Grants and Other Revenue Adjustments to the Cost Basis The City has two dedicated outside funding sources for parks capital projects; transfers from the City s General Fund (from construction sales tax collections) and 1/10th of 1% of voter approved countywide sales tax. A total of $1,500,000 ($250,000 per year) for General Fund transfers (construction sales tax) and $1,665,616 for the countywide sales tax were budgeted over the period. As explained earlier, growth s proportionate share of these revenues must be credited towards the impact fee cost basis. Growth s share (11.97%) of these two revenue sources is $378,886. Additionally, the City expects to receive $3,917,292 in grant money for its 6-year capital facilities plan. City staff estimated that the growth related portion of expected grants would be $1,758,987. [It should be noted that expected grants were not confirmed at the time of this study.] C. Impact Fee Calculation Once the growth projections are established and the total cost basis net of adjustments is determined, the calculation of impact fees is a straightforward exercise. Based on the revised parks, recreation and open space standards, projected population growth, and estimated unit costs; the total cost basis was calculated to be $8,272,186. After adjusting for other funding sources and anticipated grant monies, the net cost basis was $6,134,312. Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc Page 6

10 Parks Impact Fee Study City of Puyallup, Washington Final Report The net cost basis was divided by the projected population growth (4,272) to arrive at per capita parks impact fee ($1,436). As mentioned earlier, parks impact fees are applied per residential unit. Using estimated average number of occupants per dwelling unit, the calculated per capita impact fee was converted to a per residential unit basis. The calculated parks impact fee for the City of Puyallup is as follows: Exhibit 4: Calculated Parks Impact Fee Weighted Average Per Unit Occupancy Calculated Impact Fee Uniform Fee for All Residential Units persons $3,675 These results represent defensible maximum parks impact fees based on the recommended level of service standards, assumptions and policy considerations explained above. Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc Page 7

11 Parks Impact Fee Study City of Puyallup, Washington Final Report IV. COMPARISON WITH NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS FCS Group also surveyed neighboring jurisdictions to prepare a comparative analysis of parks impact fees applied to new development. Jurisdiction Exhibit 6: Comparison of Parks Impact Fees Single Family Residential Multi Family Residential (per unit) City of Puyallup (calculated legal maximum) $3,675 Same as SFR City of Edgewood $2,939 Same as SFR City of Fife $1,700 $1,300 City of Bonney Lake $1,500 Same as SFR City of Puyallup (current) $491 $323 City of Sumner $418 Same as SFR Pierce County $300 $150 Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc Page 8

12 TECHNICAL APPENDICES Appendix A: Analysis Spreadsheets Appendix B: Issue Paper 1: Impact Fee Calculation Methodologies Issue Paper 2: Differentiation of Impact Fees Between Customer Classes

13 APPENDIX A Analysis Spreadsheets

14 APPENDIX A CITY OF PUYALLUP Parks Impact Fee Study Growth Projections Based on Buildable Lands Report 2000 Population 33, Estimated Population 35, Projected Population 50,100 Number of Years 18 Average Annual Growth Rate 1.9% No of Years in Period Projected Population 36, Projected Population 40,629 Added Population 4,272 Total Growth Rate Over 6 Years 11.97% EQUIVALENCY FACTORS Customer Classes Per Unit Occupancies Single-family Equivalents Single-family Residential persons / unit SFE Multi-family Residential persons / unit SFE Mobile Homes persons / unit SFE Estimated Weighted Avg. Basis for Uniform Charge No of Units Occupancy Population Occupancy Number of Single-family Units 8, ,015 Number of Multi-family Units 3, ,165 Total 11,793 30, Prepared by FCS Group, Inc. (425) Page 1

15 APPENDIX A CITY OF PUYALLUP Parks Impact Fee Study Standard-Driven Impact Fee - Adopted/Proposed Level of Service Existing Requirement Existing Total Requirement for projected Activity / Facility Adopted/Proposed LOS Inventory for 2004 pop. of Existing LOS Deficiency Surplus growth of 4,272 35,690 Adopted LOS Existing LOS A. Parks Neighborhood Park [1] 1.00 ac. per 1,500 pop ac ac ac. per 1,500 pop ac. - ac ac ac. Community Park 5.00 ac. per 1,000 pop ac ac ac. per 1,000 pop. - ac ac ac ac. B. Trails Multi-Use Trail 0.15 mi. per 1,000 pop mi mi mi. per 1,000 pop mi. - mi mi mi. C. Facilities Baseball Field [1] 1.00 per 12,000 pop per 12,000 pop Youth Ballfield [1] 1.00 per 5,000 pop per 5,000 pop Softball Field [1] 1.00 per 7,000 pop per 7,000 pop Soccer Field 1.00 per 5,000 pop per 5,000 pop Tennis Court [1] 1.00 per 5,000 pop per 5,000 pop Football Field [2] - per 20,000 pop per 20,000 pop Indoor Pool [2] - per 20,000 pop per 20,000 pop Gymnasium 1.00 per 5,000 pop per 5,000 pop Children's Play Structures 1.00 per 2,000 pop per 2,000 pop NOTES: [1] Proposed LOS is less than Adopted LOS per Parks Master Plan. Modification required to Parks Master Plan. [2] Adopted standard per Parks Plan. Deleted from impact fee calculation.

16 APPENDIX A CITY OF PUYALLUP Parks Impact Fee Study Standard-Driven Impact Fee - Adopted/Proposed Level of Service Requirement Cost of Existing Cost of Total Activity / Facility Level of Service Used for Unit Cost Growth Deficiency Deficiency Cost Growth A. Parks Neighborhood Park [1] Proposed LOS 2.85 ac. $ 195,150 per acre $ 555, ac. $ 310,939 $ 866,683 Community Park Adopted LOS ac. $ 241,150 per acre $ 5,150,564 - ac. $ - $ 5,150,564 B. Trails Multi-Use Trail Adopted LOS 0.64 mi. $ 525,680 per mi. $ 336, mi. $ 175,314 $ 512,144 C. Facilities Baseball Field [1] Proposed LOS 0.36 $ 705,850 per field $ 251, $ 1,393,466 $ 1,644,729 Youth Ballfield [1] Proposed LOS 0.85 $ 504,950 per field $ 431,396 - $ - $ 431,396 Softball Field [1] Proposed LOS 0.61 $ 504,950 per field $ 308, $ 554,724 $ 862,863 Soccer Field Adopted LOS 0.85 $ 394,875 per field $ 337,355 - $ - $ 337,355 Tennis Court [1] Proposed LOS 0.85 $ 34,500 per court $ 29,475 - $ - $ 29,475 Football Field [2] Adopted LOS - $ 258,750 per field $ - - $ - $ - Indoor Pool [2] Adopted LOS - $ 1,293,750 per pool $ - - $ - $ - Gymnasium Adopted LOS 0.85 $ 920,000 per gymnasium $ 785,987 - $ - $ 785,987 Children's Play Structures Adopted LOS 2.14 $ 40,000 per play structure $ 85,433 - $ - $ 85,433 Total $ 8,272,186 $ 2,434,442 $ 10,706,628 Percentage Shares 77.26% 22.74% % NOTES: [1] Proposed LOS is less than Adopted LOS per Parks Master Plan. Modification required to Parks Master Plan. [2] Adopted standard per Parks Plan. Deleted from impact fee calculation.

17 APPENDIX A CITY OF PUYALLUP Parks Impact Fee Study Standard-Driven Impact Fee - Adopted/Proposed Level of Service COST BASIS Cost of Growth to Meet Proposed LOS $ 8,272,186 Adjustments 1. Dedicated Revenues less: Transfer from General Fund (Construction Sales Tax), 2006 ($250,000) less: Transfer from General Fund (Construction Sales Tax), 2007 ($250,000) less: Transfer from General Fund (Construction Sales Tax), 2008 ($250,000) less: Transfer from General Fund (Construction Sales Tax), 2009 ($250,000) less: Transfer from General Fund (Construction Sales Tax), 2010 ($250,000) less: Transfer from General Fund (Construction Sales Tax), 2011 ($250,000) subtotal ($1,500,000) less: 1/10th of 1% Sales Tax, 2006 ($257,500) less: 1/10th of 1% Sales Tax, 2007 ($265,225) less: 1/10th of 1% Sales Tax, 2008 ($273,182) less: 1/10th of 1% Sales Tax, 2009 ($281,377) less: 1/10th of 1% Sales Tax, 2010 ($289,819) less: 1/10th of 1% Sales Tax, 2011 ($298,513) subtotal ($1,665,616) Total Adjustments ($3,165,616) Share of Total Growth in Period 11.97% Adjustments for Dedicated Revenues ($378,886) 2. Grants Proportionate Share of Growth ($1,758,987) Adjustments for Grants ($1,758,987) 3. Cash Balance less: Cash Balance $0 Adjustments for Cash Balance $0 Net Cost Basis $ 6,134,312 CUSTOMER BASIS Projected population growth 4,272 Number of people per single-family equivalent Number of single-family equivalents 1,492 PARKS IMPACT FEE Per Capita Impact Fee $ 1,436 Equivalency Impact Fees by Customer Class Factors Impact Fees Single-family Residential $ 4,113 Multi-family Residential $ 2,739 Uniform Impact Fee for All Classes Avg. No. of Occupants per Unit Impact Fee per Unit $ 3,675 Prepared by FCS Group, Inc. (425) Page 1

18 APPENDIX B Issue Paper 1: Impact Fee Calculation Methodologies Issue Paper 2: Differentiation of Impact Fees Between Customer Classes

19 CITY OF PUYALLUP Parks Impact Fee Study July 12, 2005 ISSUE PAPER 1 Impact Fee Calculation Methodologies Issue Alternatives Analysis There are generally two methods of determining impact fees: the standards-driven approach and the improvements-driven approach. The standards-driven method uses the adopted standard (for parks, usually expressed as acres, miles, number of playfields, etc. per 1,000 population) to arrive at the need for additional park space and facilities [as a unit cost] to serve each increment of growth. The improvements-driven method requires the identification of specific growth-related portions of planned projects. The sum total of growthrelated project costs, with adjustments, becomes the impact fee basis. Which one of these impact fee calculation methodologies would be more appropriate for determining the City of Puyallup s Parks Impact Fees? The City could choose to use either a standards-driven or improvementsdriven approach to calculate its parks impact fees. According to Washington law, impact fees (a) can be imposed for system improvements that are reasonably related to the new development; (b) can not exceed a proportionate share of the costs of system improvements that are reasonably related to the new development, and (c) should be used for system improvements that will reasonably benefit the new development. (RCW ). RCW further dictates that impact fee receipts should be earmarked specifically and retained in special interest-bearing accounts, and should be expended or encumbered for a permissible use within six years of receipt. In other words, regardless of the calculation methodology, impact fee revenues need to be linked to the developmentrelated capital improvements plan. Since the improvements-driven approach is directly based on the capital improvement plan, it would be easier for the City to link the revenues collected to growth related project costs to be paid. On the other hand, the standards-driven approach is based on adopted and/or existing standards. It has no direct linkage to the project costs planned for near future (6 years) except for the fact that fee revenue can be expended on these projects. Therefore, it might be more difficult to link impact fee revenues with growth related projects, and administer the use of the impact fee fund. Another issue that might raise a concern about the defensibility of standards-driven impact fees is that they carry the implication that the City s existing parks meet its standard for the existing population. If that is not the case, then a city must include projects in its Plan that will correct its existing deficiency, or ensure that its impact fees do not hold new development to a higher standard than it is in itself meeting. FINANCIAL CONSULTING SOLUTIONS GROUP, INC. Page 1 Telephone (425) F:\Puyallup\892 ParkImpactFees 05\Documentation\IP#1 - Calculation Methodology.doc

20 CITY OF PUYALLUP Parks Impact Fee Study July 12, 2005 Recommendation One alternative to avoid this situation is to calculate impact fees based on the City s existing (current) level of service. This might result in a lower fee and revenue collection than the City is planning to spend on growth related projects. Such facilities would ultimately be paid by the City s existing customer base. Despite these concerns, the standards-driven approach is generally easier to calculate and more commonly used. Using the adopted standards and growth projections, it is relatively easy to calculate the additional demand for public parks and open space to accommodate the projected new residential growth. A critical piece of information needed to arrive at the total cost basis for parks impact fees is the estimated unit cost for each type of public parks and facilities. Once the unit cost estimates are generated, calculation of parks impact fees is a straightforward exercise. On the other hand, the improvements-driven approach necessitates identification of specific growth-related portions of planned capital projects. At times, this might be a challenging task, because some projects might be renewing/replacing an existing facility or some of its components, while at the same time adding additional capacity. It might be difficult for the City to quantify these two functions (i.e. capacity additions to serve growth, and renewal and replacement for existing users) for each planned project. As part of our engagement with the City to develop parks impact fees, we surveyed eight (8) neighboring jurisdictions. The jurisdictions surveyed included the cities of Bonney Lake, Fife, Edgewood, Sumner, Auburn, Tacoma, and Federal Way as well as Pierce County. Only four (4) of these jurisdictions have parks impact fees, the others do not charge parks impact fees. Of those four jurisdictions that do charge parks impact fees, two (2) (City of Edgewood, Pierce County) use the standards-driven approach. We were not able to identify the calculation methodology for the parks impact fees of the cities of Bonney Lake and Fife. It should be noted that Puyallup s existing parks impact fees are based on the standards-driven approach. It is our understanding that the City needs to have an adopted parks standard (i.e. level of service) to establish its parks impact fees using the standards-driven approach. The City s Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan Update dated April 2002 identifies the existing and recommended level of service standards for various types of parks and facilities. We believe that since this planning document would be adequate for setting up the City s parks impact fees. The City may wish to obtain a legal opinion on this matter. FCS Group will calculate the impact fees using both approaches assuming that all the necessary data is available. We believe that the City should evaluate the outcome of the analyses, their defensibility, and ease of administration of the impact fee fund (in terms of linking the use of impact fee revenue to the growth related FINANCIAL CONSULTING SOLUTIONS GROUP, INC. Page 2 Telephone (425) F:\Puyallup\892 ParkImpactFees 05\Documentation\IP#1 - Calculation Methodology.doc

21 CITY OF PUYALLUP Parks Impact Fee Study July 12, 2005 project costs), and make a policy choice about the approach to be implemented. FINANCIAL CONSULTING SOLUTIONS GROUP, INC. Page 3 Telephone (425) F:\Puyallup\892 ParkImpactFees 05\Documentation\IP#1 - Calculation Methodology.doc

22 CITY OF PUYALLUP Parks Impact Fee Study July 12, 2005 ISSUE PAPER 2 Differentiation of Impact Fees Between Customer Classes Issue Alternatives Analysis Should the City of Puyallup s (City) Parks Impact Fee Schedule differentiate between residential customer classes? The City can charge a uniform Parks Impact Fee to all new residential development (e.g., single-family units, multi-family units, etc.) regardless of the type of development or, alternatively, the City can apply a different fee for different types of residential development. In other words, singlefamily residential dwellings can be charged a higher fee than multi-family residential dwellings, based on the average number of residents per dwelling unit. Regardless of the calculation methodology chosen, parks impact fees are initially calculated on a per capita basis. In other words, impact fees theoretically represent the amount of capital spending required to serve an additional person who would live within the City boundaries. However, impact fees are collected on a per dwelling unit basis. Therefore, the calculated per capita impact fee must be converted into a per dwelling unit fee using an assumed average number of occupants per dwelling unit. Depending on the policy choice, the City might choose to use a single conversion factor or a different average number of occupants per single-family residential unit and per multi-family residential unit. The former would reflect the assumption that there is no significant difference between a single-family residential unit and multifamily residential unit in terms of additional need for public parks and open space. This assumption would result in a uniform parks impact fee for all new residential development. The second approach, in which different densities are used to calculate different fees for different types of dwelling units (e.g., single-family vs. multi-family) generates different impact fees for single-family residential units that multi-family residential units on the premise that the additional demand for parks placed on each new single-family residential unit is different than that of multi-family residential unit. The main argument for a differentiated impact fee is that the number of occupants in a single-family dwelling unit is typically larger than the number of occupants in a multi-family dwelling unit. Presumably, each additional single-family dwelling unit places a higher demand on public parks and open spaces. However, multi-family residential buildings often provide its occupants with facilities for recreation activities such as swimming pools, exercise and fitness rooms, open space, etc. These onthe-premise facilities also result in a smaller need for a public park for its occupants. FINANCIAL CONSULTING SOLUTIONS GROUP, INC. Page 1 Telephone (425) F:\Puyallup\892 ParkImpactFees 05\Documentation\IP#2 - Customer Differentiation.doc

23 CITY OF PUYALLUP Parks Impact Fee Study July 12, 2005 Recommendation On the other hand, proponents of a uniform fee schedule claim that a single-family residential building typically provides a larger yard space for its occupants and this reduces the need and use of public parks and that multi-family dwelling units have comparatively fewer on-site recreation opportunities. Thus, the fact that the average number of occupants is higher does not necessarily mean that demand for public parks is higher. Therefore, all new development should be subject to the same impact fee. In reality, both arguments are valid to some extent, but it is difficult to quantify and determine the actual demand for public parks by occupants of various types of residential developments. Therefore, the final outcome could only be decided by a policy choice rather than the analysis. Our survey of impact fees charged by the neighboring communities reflects this reality. We surveyed eight (8) jurisdictions and found out that only four (4) of them (cities of Bonney Lake, Fife, and Edgewood as well as Pierce County) have parks impact fees. The others (cities of Sumner, Tacoma, Federal Way, and Auburn) do not charge parks impact fees on new development. Of these four (4) jurisdictions that charge a parks impact fee, two (2) (cities of Bonney Lake and Edgewood) apply a uniform parks impact fee to all new development. Pierce County has two separate fee classes and differentiates between single-family residential unit and multi-family residential unit. The City of Fife s parks impact fee schedule contains five (5) separate fee classes. These classes are singlefamily detached housing, two residential unit attached housing (duplex), three-four residential unit structure, five or more residential unit structure, and manufactured homes. The City of Puyallup s current fee schedule has three fee classes; singlefamily residential, multi-family residential, and mobile/manufactured home. We believe that the effect of yards on single-family residences and/or recreation facilities provided by multi-family residential buildings on the demand for public parks are somewhat subjective and almost impossible to quantify. In contrast, population census results and other studies provide us with the average number of occupants in each type of residential unit. The most recent estimates indicate that the average number of occupants in a single-family residence, multi-family dwelling unit, and mobile home are 2.864, 1.907, and 2.500, respectively. Based on this information, we recommend that the City consider three distinct classes: single-family residential, multi-family residential, and mobile homes. If the City determines to use only two distinctions, then we would recommend treating mobile homes as single-family residences. FINANCIAL CONSULTING SOLUTIONS GROUP, INC. Page 2 Telephone (425) F:\Puyallup\892 ParkImpactFees 05\Documentation\IP#2 - Customer Differentiation.doc

RATE STUDY IMPACT FEES PARKS

RATE STUDY IMPACT FEES PARKS RATE STUDY FOR IMPACT FEES FOR PARKS CITY OF KENMORE, WASHINGTON May 15, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary................................................... 1 1. Statutory Basis and Methodology

More information

HANSFORD ECONOMIC CONSULTING

HANSFORD ECONOMIC CONSULTING HANSFORD ECONOMIC CONSULTING Economic Assessment for Northlight Properties at Old Greenwood April 20, 2015 HEC Project #140150 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION Report Contact PAGE iii 1. Introduction and Summary

More information

Orange Water and Sewer Authority Water and Sewer System Development Fee Study

Orange Water and Sewer Authority Water and Sewer System Development Fee Study Orange Water and Sewer Authority Water and Sewer System Development Fee Study March 6, 2018 March 6, 2018 Mr. Stephen Winters Director of Finance and Customer Service 400 Jones Ferry Road Carrboro, NC

More information

RATE STUDY IMPACT FEES ROADS

RATE STUDY IMPACT FEES ROADS RATE STUDY FOR IMPACT FEES FOR ROADS CITY OF PUYALLUP, WASHINGTON November 8, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary............................................ 1 1. Statutory Basis and Methodology for

More information

REAL ESTATE MARKET AND YOUR TAX

REAL ESTATE MARKET AND YOUR TAX REAL ESTATE MARKET AND YOUR TAX ASSESSMENT All of us Island property owners received our tax assessment notices from the County recently. As real estate agents we have been fielding many questions about

More information

Before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission State of Minnesota. Docket No. E002/GR Exhibit (LMC-1) Property Taxes

Before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission State of Minnesota. Docket No. E002/GR Exhibit (LMC-1) Property Taxes Direct Testimony and Schedules Leanna M. Chapman Before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission State of Minnesota In the Matter of the Application of Northern States Power Company for Authority to Increase

More information

SOUTH DAVIS METRO FIRE AGENCY FIRE IMPACT FEE FACILITIES PLAN (IFFP) AND IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS (IFA)

SOUTH DAVIS METRO FIRE AGENCY FIRE IMPACT FEE FACILITIES PLAN (IFFP) AND IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS (IFA) SOUTH DAVIS METRO FIRE AGENCY FIRE IMPACT FEE FACILITIES PLAN (IFFP) AND IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS (IFA) JULY 2012 PREPARED BY LEWIS YOUNG ROBERTSON & BURNINGHAM, INC. IMPACT FEE FACILITIES PLAN AND IMPACT FEE

More information

CHICO/CARD AREA PARK FEE NEXUS STUDY

CHICO/CARD AREA PARK FEE NEXUS STUDY REVISED FINAL REPORT CHICO/CARD AREA PARK FEE NEXUS STUDY Prepared for: City of Chico and Chico Area Recreation District (CARD) Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. December 2, 2003 EPS #12607

More information

Capital Improvements Plan and Impact Fee Study

Capital Improvements Plan and Impact Fee Study Capital Improvements Plan and Impact Fee Study Prepared for: Hendersonville, Tennessee January 4, 2019 4701 Sangamore Road Suite S240 Bethesda, MD (301) 320-6900 www.tischlerbise.com TABLE OF CONTENTS

More information

Table 4b-1. City of Bremerton Building Permits CITY OF BREMERTON: NEW UNITS Type

Table 4b-1. City of Bremerton Building Permits CITY OF BREMERTON: NEW UNITS Type City of Bremerton Growth from 2006-2012 OFM City of Bremerton Population Estimate Highlights The City of Bremerton had a 2006 population of 36,202 The City of Bremerton had a 2012 population of 39,650

More information

BUILD-OUT ANALYSIS GRANTHAM, NEW HAMPSHIRE

BUILD-OUT ANALYSIS GRANTHAM, NEW HAMPSHIRE BUILD-OUT ANALYSIS GRANTHAM, NEW HAMPSHIRE A Determination of the Maximum Amount of Future Residential Development Possible Under Current Land Use Regulations Prepared for the Town of Grantham by Upper

More information

Real Estate Reference Material

Real Estate Reference Material Valuation Land valuation Land is the basic essential of property development and unlike building commodities - such as concrete, steel and labour - it is in relatively limited supply. Quality varies between

More information

Town of Prescott Valley 2013 Land Use Assumptions

Town of Prescott Valley 2013 Land Use Assumptions Town of Prescott Valley 2013 Land Use Assumptions Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. November 22, 2013 Table of Contents Purpose of this Report... 1 The Town of Prescott Valley... 2 Summary of Land Use

More information

Cedar Hammock Fire Control District

Cedar Hammock Fire Control District Cedar Hammock Fire Control District FY 2015 Fire/Rescue Impact Fee Study February 24, 2016 Prepared by: February 24, 2016 Mr. Jeff Hoyle Fire Chief 5200 26 th St W Bradenton, FL 34207 Re: FY 2015 Impact

More information

III. Housing Profile and Analysis

III. Housing Profile and Analysis III. Housing Profile and Analysis 3-1 III. Housing Profile and Analysis A. Housing Types Information on the type of housing available is important to have a clear picture of what Lacey has in its housing

More information

Settlement Pattern & Form with service costs analysis Preliminary Report

Settlement Pattern & Form with service costs analysis Preliminary Report Settlement Pattern & Form with service costs analysis Preliminary Report Prepared for Regional Planning Halifax Regional Municipality by Financial Services, HRM May 15, 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...

More information

Development Impact Fee Study

Development Impact Fee Study Development Impact Fee Study Prepared for: Tega Cay, South Carolina July 8, 2018 4701 Sangamore Road Suite S240 Bethesda, MD (301) 320-6900 www.tischlerbise.com [PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] Development

More information

AN ECONOMIC, FISCAL AND CAPITAL ASSET IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THIRTEEN PROPOSED NEW DEVELOPMENTS ON THE TOWN OF DENTON, MARYLAND.

AN ECONOMIC, FISCAL AND CAPITAL ASSET IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THIRTEEN PROPOSED NEW DEVELOPMENTS ON THE TOWN OF DENTON, MARYLAND. AN ECONOMIC, FISCAL AND CAPITAL ASSET IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THIRTEEN PROPOSED NEW DEVELOPMENTS ON THE TOWN OF DENTON, MARYLAND Prepared for The Denton Town Council Denton, Maryland by Dean D. Bellas, Ph.D.

More information

Citywide Development Impact Fee Study

Citywide Development Impact Fee Study CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Citywide Development Impact Fee Study CONSOLIDATED REPORT March 2008 San Francisco, California Redmond, Washington Milwaukie, Oregon www.fcsgroup.com CITY-WIDE DEVELOPMENT

More information

Capital Improvement Plans and Development Impact Fees

Capital Improvement Plans and Development Impact Fees Capital Improvement Plans and Development Impact Fees City of Submitted to: City of September 29, 2011 Prepared by: 4701 Sangamore Road Suite S240 Bethesda, Maryland 20816 800.424.4318 www.tischlerbise.com

More information

School Impact Fee Study and Capital Improvement Plan

School Impact Fee Study and Capital Improvement Plan and Capital Improvement Plan Prepared for: April 18, 2018 4701 Sangamore Road Suite S240 Bethesda, MD (301) 320-6900 www.tischlerbise.com [PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] School Impact Fee Study TABLE OF

More information

This article is relevant to the Diploma in International Financial Reporting and ACCA Qualification Papers F7 and P2

This article is relevant to the Diploma in International Financial Reporting and ACCA Qualification Papers F7 and P2 REVENUE RECOGNITION This article is relevant to the Diploma in International Financial Reporting and ACCA Qualification Papers F7 and P2 For almost all entities other than financial institutions, revenue

More information

FINAL REPORT AN ANALYSIS OF SECONDARY ROAD MAINTENANCE PAYMENTS TO HENRICO AND ARLINGTON COUNTIES WITH THE DECEMBER 2001 UPDATE

FINAL REPORT AN ANALYSIS OF SECONDARY ROAD MAINTENANCE PAYMENTS TO HENRICO AND ARLINGTON COUNTIES WITH THE DECEMBER 2001 UPDATE FINAL REPORT AN ANALYSIS OF SECONDARY ROAD MAINTENANCE PAYMENTS TO HENRICO AND ARLINGTON COUNTIES WITH THE DECEMBER 2001 UPDATE Robert A. Hanson, P.E. Senior Research Scientist Cherie A. Kyte Senior Research

More information

RATE STUDY IMPACT FEES TRANSPORTATION

RATE STUDY IMPACT FEES TRANSPORTATION RATE STUDY FOR IMPACT FEES FOR TRANSPORTATION CITY OF SHORELINE, WASHINGTON April 24, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...1 1. STATUTORY BASIS AND METHODOLOGY...5 2. ROAD SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT COSTS

More information

Chapter 12 Changes Since This is just a brief and cursory comparison. More analysis will be done at a later date.

Chapter 12 Changes Since This is just a brief and cursory comparison. More analysis will be done at a later date. Chapter 12 Changes Since 1986 This approach to Fiscal Analysis was first done in 1986 for the City of Anoka. It was the first of its kind and was recognized by the National Science Foundation (NSF). Geographic

More information

Guide to Appraisal Reports

Guide to Appraisal Reports Guide to Appraisal Reports What is an appraisal? An appraisal is an independent valuation of real property prepared by a qualified Appraiser and fully documented in a report. Based on a series of appraisal

More information

DRAFT REPORT. Boudreau Developments Ltd. Hole s Site - The Botanica: Fiscal Impact Analysis. December 18, 2012

DRAFT REPORT. Boudreau Developments Ltd. Hole s Site - The Botanica: Fiscal Impact Analysis. December 18, 2012 Boudreau Developments Ltd. Hole s Site - The Botanica: Fiscal Impact Analysis DRAFT REPORT December 18, 2012 2220 Sun Life Place 10123-99 St. Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3H1 T 780.425.6741 F 780.426.3737 www.think-applications.com

More information

Frequently asked questions on business combinations

Frequently asked questions on business combinations 23 Frequently asked questions on business combinations This article aims to: Highlight some of the key examples discussed in the education material on Ind AS 103. Background Ind AS 103, Business Combinations

More information

Investor Advisory Committee 401 Merritt 7, P.O. Box 5116, Norwalk, Connecticut Phone: Fax:

Investor Advisory Committee 401 Merritt 7, P.O. Box 5116, Norwalk, Connecticut Phone: Fax: 401 Merritt 7, P.O. Box 5116, Norwalk, Connecticut 06856-5116 Phone: 203 956-5207 Fax: 203 849-9714 Via Email November 5, 2014 Technical Director Financial Accounting Standards Board File Reference No.

More information

FINAL SCHOOL IMPACT FEES

FINAL SCHOOL IMPACT FEES FINAL SCHOOL IMPACT FEES Prepared for: February 10, 2015 4701 Sangamore Road, Suite S240 Bethesda, MD 301.320.6900 www.tischlerbise.com i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY...

More information

Intangibles CHAPTER CHAPTER OBJECTIVES. After careful study of this chapter, you will be able to:

Intangibles CHAPTER CHAPTER OBJECTIVES. After careful study of this chapter, you will be able to: CHAPTER Intangibles CHAPTER OBJECTIVES After careful study of this chapter, you will be able to: 1. Explain the accounting alternatives for intangibles. 2. Record the amortization or impairment of intangibles.

More information

Return on Investment Model

Return on Investment Model THOMAS JEFFERSON PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION Return on Investment Model Last Updated 7/11/2013 The Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission developed a Return on Investment model that calculates

More information

WELLSVILLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN

WELLSVILLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN WELLSVILLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN 2014 DRAFT 2.2 Wellsville: Affordable Housing Plan 2014 Page 2 DRAFT 2.2 Wellsville: Affordable Housing Plan 2014 Table of Contents Summary of Affordable Housing Conditions...

More information

Table 4d-1. City of Poulsbo Residential Building Permits CITY OF POULSBO Unit Type

Table 4d-1. City of Poulsbo Residential Building Permits CITY OF POULSBO Unit Type City of Poulsbo Growth from 2006-2012 OFM City of Poulsbo Population Estimate Highlights The City of Poulsbo had a 2006 population of 7,722 The City of Poulsbo had a 2012 population of 9,360 Resident population

More information

RIVER DANCE RV PARK ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT REPORT TOWN OF GYPSUM - SEPTEMBER RPI Consulting LLC.

RIVER DANCE RV PARK ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT REPORT TOWN OF GYPSUM - SEPTEMBER RPI Consulting LLC. RIVER DANCE RV PARK ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT REPORT TOWN OF GYPSUM - SEPTEMBER 2017 RPI Consulting LLC Durango, Colorado TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Summary of Findings

More information

Panama City Beach Fire Service Assessment Information

Panama City Beach Fire Service Assessment Information Panama City Beach Fire Service Assessment Information On November 9, 2017, the City of Panama City Beach scheduled a public hearing for January 11, 2018 to consider the adoption of a special assessment

More information

ORDINANCE WHEREAS, this title is intended to implement and be consistent with the county comprehensive plan; and

ORDINANCE WHEREAS, this title is intended to implement and be consistent with the county comprehensive plan; and ORDINANCE 2005-015 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ADOPTING TITLE X, IMPACT FEES, AND AMENDING CODE SECTION 953, FAIR SHARE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS, OF THE

More information

UPDATE ON AUTHORITY TO CHARGE WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT FEES

UPDATE ON AUTHORITY TO CHARGE WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT FEES UPDATE ON AUTHORITY TO CHARGE WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT FEES Jeff Hughes Lecturer and Director of Environmental Finance Center School of Government jhughes@sog.unc.edu 919.843.4956 www.efc.sog.unc.edu Kara

More information

Cabarrus County, NC Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. Contents

Cabarrus County, NC Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. Contents Contents Section 15. Adequate Public Facilities Standards.... 2 Section 15-1. Introduction.... 2 Section 15-2. How to Use this Chapter.... 3 Section 15-3. Basic Terms and Definitions... 4 Section 15-4.

More information

SCHOOL FINANCE: IMPACT FEES and a COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS. First Things. How Do We Pay? What Are We Talking About? How Do We Pay?

SCHOOL FINANCE: IMPACT FEES and a COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS. First Things. How Do We Pay? What Are We Talking About? How Do We Pay? SCHOOL FINANCE: IMPACT FEES and a COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS Theodore B. DuBose Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, P.A. Presented to: SC School Boards Association 2016 School Law Conference Charleston, South Carolina

More information

Multifamily Housing Revenue Bond Rules

Multifamily Housing Revenue Bond Rules Multifamily Housing Revenue Bond Rules 12.1. General. (a) Authority. The rules in this chapter apply to the issuance of multifamily housing revenue bonds ("Bonds") by the Texas Department of Housing and

More information

City of Salinas Nexus Studies Overview and Summary February 2016

City of Salinas Nexus Studies Overview and Summary February 2016 City of Salinas Nexus Studies Overview and Summary February 2016 1) Introduction The City of Salinas is looking at ways to increase the supply of affordable housing in Salinas. The City already has a successful

More information

MEMORANDUM. Trip generation rates based on a variety of residential and commercial land use categories 1 Urban form and location factors the Ds 2

MEMORANDUM. Trip generation rates based on a variety of residential and commercial land use categories 1 Urban form and location factors the Ds 2 MEMORANDUM Date: September 22, 2015 To: From: Subject: Paul Stickney Chris Breiland and Sarah Keenan Analysis of Sammamish Town Center Trip Generation Rates and the Ability to Meet Additional Economic

More information

RE: Request for Comments on the Exposure Draft The Valuation of Forests dated November 16, 2012

RE: Request for Comments on the Exposure Draft The Valuation of Forests dated November 16, 2012 200 W. Madison St. T 312-335-4100 Suite 1500 F 312-335-4400 Chicago, IL 60606 www.appraisalinstitute.org Mr. Steven J. Sherman, Chairman Standards Board International Valuation Standards Council 41 Moorgate

More information

4. Parks and Recreation Fee Facility Needs and Cost Estimates Fee Calculation Nexus Findings 24

4. Parks and Recreation Fee Facility Needs and Cost Estimates Fee Calculation Nexus Findings 24 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE 1. Introduction and Summary of Calculated Fees 1 1.1 Background and Study Objectives 1 1.2 Organization of the Report 2 1.3 Calculated Development Impact Fees 2 2. Fee Methodology

More information

FIRE FACILITIES IMPACT FEE STUDY NEWCASTLE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FINAL DRAFT JUNE 24, 2014

FIRE FACILITIES IMPACT FEE STUDY NEWCASTLE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FINAL DRAFT JUNE 24, 2014 FIRE FACILITIES IMPACT FEE STUDY NEWCASTLE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FINAL DRAFT JUNE 24, 2014 Oakland Office Corporate Office Other Regional Offices 1939 Harrison Street 27368 Via Industria Lancaster,

More information

Re: Fairwinds Amenity Contribution Analysis

Re: Fairwinds Amenity Contribution Analysis March 14 th, 2013 Jeremy Holm Manager, Current Planning Regional District of Nanaimo 6300 Hammond Bay Road Nanaimo, B.C. V9T 6N2 Re: Fairwinds Amenity Contribution Analysis The Regional District of Nanaimo

More information

Leases. (a) the lease transfers ownership of the asset to the lessee by the end of the lease term.

Leases. (a) the lease transfers ownership of the asset to the lessee by the end of the lease term. Leases 1.1. Classification of leases A lease is classified as a finance lease if it transfers substantially all the risks and rewards incidental to ownership. A lease is classified as an operating lease

More information

Housing Characteristics

Housing Characteristics CHAPTER 7 HOUSING The housing component of the comprehensive plan is intended to provide an analysis of housing conditions and need. This component contains a discussion of McCall s 1990 housing inventory

More information

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Planning and Development

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Planning and Development U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Planning and Development Special Attention of: Notice: CPD 98-2 All Secretary's Representatives All State/Area Coordinators Issued: March 18,

More information

Equipment Leasing & Finance Association Statement to the Government Accounting Standards Board April 8, 2015

Equipment Leasing & Finance Association Statement to the Government Accounting Standards Board April 8, 2015 Equipment Leasing & Finance Association Statement to the Government Accounting Standards Board April 8, 2015 Good morning. We are members of the Accounting Committee of the Equipment Leasing and Finance

More information

Classify and describe basic forms of real estate investments.

Classify and describe basic forms of real estate investments. LOS 43.a 2017 CFA Exam SS 15 Classify and describe basic forms of real estate investments. Card 1 of 52 LOS 43.a There are four basic forms of real estate investment; private equity (direct ownership),

More information

ORANGEVALE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT

ORANGEVALE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT ORANGEVALE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT PARK IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY JULY 2010 REVISED FINAL REPORT PREPARED FOR: BOARD OF DIRECTORS PREPARED BY: SCIConsultingGroup 4745 MANGELS BOULEVARD FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA

More information

D R A F T. Impact Fees

D R A F T. Impact Fees D R A F T Impact Fees February 14, 2007 Prepared By Table of Contents IMPACT FEE SUMMARY...1 HIGHLIGHTS OF THE MONTANA IMPACT FEE ACT...1 WHY IMPACT FEES?...2 Figure 1 Infrastructure Funding Alternatives...2

More information

Use of Comparables. Claims Prevention Bulletin [CP-17-E] March 1996

Use of Comparables. Claims Prevention Bulletin [CP-17-E] March 1996 March 1996 The use of comparables arises almost daily for all appraisers. especially those engaged in residential practice, where appraisals are being prepared for mortgage underwriting purposes. That

More information

RE: Exposure Draft Amendments to FASB Statement No. 140

RE: Exposure Draft Amendments to FASB Statement No. 140 November 17, 2008 Mr. Russell G. Golden Technical Director Financial Accounting Standards Board 401 Merritt 7 P.O. Box 5116 Norwalk, CT 06856-5116 RE: Exposure Draft Amendments to FASB Statement No. 140

More information

Town of Yucca Valley GENERAL PLAN 1

Town of Yucca Valley GENERAL PLAN 1 Town of Yucca Valley GENERAL PLAN 1 This page intentionally left blank. 3 HOUSING ELEMENT The Housing Element is intended to guide residential development and preservation consistent with the overall values

More information

Impact Fee Nexus & Economic Feasibility Study

Impact Fee Nexus & Economic Feasibility Study Impact Fee Nexus & Economic Feasibility Study Stakeholder Working Group November 12, 2015 Urban Economics Oakland Impact Fee Stakeholder Working Group November 12, 2015 INTRODUCTIONS 1 Agenda Introductions

More information

SCOPE OF WORK DEVELOPMENT OF A SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE PRELIMINARY REGIONAL HOUSING PLAN FOR THE SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN REGION

SCOPE OF WORK DEVELOPMENT OF A SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE PRELIMINARY REGIONAL HOUSING PLAN FOR THE SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN REGION RHP SEI SCOPE OF WORK (00203617-4).DOC KRY/NMA/BRM 5/24/12; 5/4/12 SCOPE OF WORK DEVELOPMENT OF A SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE PRELIMINARY REGIONAL HOUSING PLAN FOR THE SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN

More information

PURSUANT TO AB 1484 AND AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION TO THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE

PURSUANT TO AB 1484 AND AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION TO THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE CITY OF SAN JOSE INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' REPORT ON APPLYING AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES ON THE LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING FUND OF THE FORMER REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA PURSUANT

More information

Procedures For Collecting and Monitoring Data

Procedures For Collecting and Monitoring Data DRAFT Kitsap County Buildable Lands Program Procedures For Collecting and Monitoring Data Page 1 12/1/05 Introduction This procedures report is intended to provide guidelines for Kitsap County and its

More information

Lease modifications. Accounting for changes to lease contracts IFRS 16. September kpmg.com/ifrs

Lease modifications. Accounting for changes to lease contracts IFRS 16. September kpmg.com/ifrs Lease modifications Accounting for changes to lease contracts IFRS 16 September 2018 kpmg.com/ifrs Contents Contents Accounting for changes 1 1 At a glance 2 1.1 Key facts 2 1.2 Key impacts 3 2 Key concepts

More information

A. 1. If the proposed development contains residential development, provide the following information on Table 1 for each phase of the development.

A. 1. If the proposed development contains residential development, provide the following information on Table 1 for each phase of the development. 24. HOUSING A. 1. If the proposed development contains residential development, provide the following information on Table 1 for each phase of the development. Housing Cost* Owner-occupied $2, 28, $25,

More information

Residential Construction in Farmland Preservation Zoning Districts

Residential Construction in Farmland Preservation Zoning Districts Updated Draft: October 25, 2009 Residential Construction in Farmland Preservation Zoning Districts 2009 Wis. Act 28 repealed and recreated Wisconsin s Farmland Preservation program under ch. 91, Stats.

More information

Solutions to Questions

Solutions to Questions Uploaded By Qasim Mughal http://world-best-free.blogspot.com/ Chapter 7 Variable Costing: A Tool for Management Solutions to Questions 7-1 Absorption and variable costing differ in how they handle fixed

More information

International Valuation Standards Board 15 Feb Moorgate London EC2R 6PP United Kingdom

International Valuation Standards Board 15 Feb Moorgate London EC2R 6PP United Kingdom International Valuation Standards Board 15 Feb 2013 41 Moorgate London EC2R 6PP United Kingdom Email: commentletters@ivsc.org The Finnish Association for Real Estate Valuation appreciates the opportunity

More information

July 17, Technical Director File Reference No Re:

July 17, Technical Director File Reference No Re: July 17, 2009 Technical Director File Reference No. 1680-100 Re: Financial Accounting Standards Board ( FASB ) and International Accounting Standards Board ( IASB ) Discussion Paper titled Leases: Preliminary

More information

AAT Professional Diploma in Accounting

AAT Professional Diploma in Accounting Qualification Number: R486 04 Qualification Technical Information Version 1.1 published 13 June 2016 AAT Professional Diploma in Accounting Qualification Technical Information Units in this qualification

More information

Town of Aurora. Real Property Acquisition and Sale REPORT OF EXAMINATION 2018M-64 SEPTEMBER 2018

Town of Aurora. Real Property Acquisition and Sale REPORT OF EXAMINATION 2018M-64 SEPTEMBER 2018 DIVISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT OF EXAMINATION 2018M-64 Town of Aurora Real Property Acquisition and Sale SEPTEMBER 2018 Contents Report Highlights.............................

More information

Basic Appraisal Procedures

Basic Appraisal Procedures Hondros Learning Basic Appraisal Procedures Timed Outline Topic Area Reference(s) Learning Objectives The student will be able to identify and/or apply: Teaching Method Time Segment (Minutes) Day 1 Chapter

More information

Staying Alive! How New Lease and Other Leasehold Mortgagee Protection Provisions Really Work When the Ground Lessee Defaults

Staying Alive! How New Lease and Other Leasehold Mortgagee Protection Provisions Really Work When the Ground Lessee Defaults Staying Alive! How New Lease and Other Leasehold Mortgagee Protection Provisions Really Work When the Ground Lessee Defaults By: Janet M. Johnson 1 When entering into a long-term ground lease with a ground

More information

WYOMING DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE CHAPTER 7 PROPERTY TAX VALUATION METHODOLOGY AND ASSESSMENT (DEPARTMENT ASSESSMENTS)

WYOMING DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE CHAPTER 7 PROPERTY TAX VALUATION METHODOLOGY AND ASSESSMENT (DEPARTMENT ASSESSMENTS) CHAPTER 7 PROPERTY TAX VALUATION METHODOLOGY AND ASSESSMENT (DEPARTMENT ASSESSMENTS) Section 1. Authority. These Rules are promulgated under the authority of W.S. 39-11-102(b). Section 2. Purpose of Rules.

More information

City of Bellingham Urban Growth Area - Land Supply Analysis Summary

City of Bellingham Urban Growth Area - Land Supply Analysis Summary City of Bellingham Urban Growth Area - Land Supply Analysis Summary Population & Employment Growth Forecasts APPENDIX D, ATTACHMENT 3 The ECONorthwest Whatcom County Population & Economic Forecasts report

More information

Agreements for the Construction of Real Estate

Agreements for the Construction of Real Estate HK(IFRIC)-Int 15 Revised August 2010September 2018 Effective for annual periods beginning on or after 1 January 2009* HK(IFRIC) Interpretation 15 Agreements for the Construction of Real Estate * HK(IFRIC)-Int

More information

2017 Uniform Multifamily Application Templates

2017 Uniform Multifamily Application Templates 2017 Uniform Multifamily Application Templates 221 East 11 th Street Austin, TX 78701 Table of Contents Template Overview... 3 Using the Templates... 4 Public Notification Template... 5 Twice the State

More information

DRAFT. Development Impact Fee Model Ordinance. Mount Pleasant, SC. Draft Document. City Explained, Inc. J. R. Wilburn and Associates, Inc.

DRAFT. Development Impact Fee Model Ordinance. Mount Pleasant, SC. Draft Document. City Explained, Inc. J. R. Wilburn and Associates, Inc. City Explained, Inc. J. R. Wilburn and Associates, Inc. Development Impact Fee Model Ordinance Mount Pleasant, SC Draft Document January 11, 2017 ARTICLE I. TITLE This ordinance shall be referred to as

More information

MEMORANDUM Planning Commission Travis Parker, Planning Director DATE: April 4, 2018 Lakewood Zoning Amendments Housing and Mixed Use

MEMORANDUM Planning Commission Travis Parker, Planning Director DATE: April 4, 2018 Lakewood Zoning Amendments Housing and Mixed Use MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Travis Parker, Planning Director DATE: April 4, 2018 SUBJECT: Lakewood Zoning Amendments Housing and Mixed Use In August 2017, the Lakewood Development Dialogue process began with

More information

REVENUE ESTIMATING CONFERENCE TAX: ISSUE:

REVENUE ESTIMATING CONFERENCE TAX: ISSUE: REVENUE ESTIMATING CONFERENCE TAX: Ad Valorem ISSUE: Millage rate cap of 13.5 mills (1.35%) on all real property BILL NUMBER(S): HB 385 SPONSOR(S): Rivera MONTH/YEAR COLLECTION IMPACT BEGINS: DATE OF ANALYSIS:

More information

The New Housing Market and its Effect on Infrastructure Financing Capacity

The New Housing Market and its Effect on Infrastructure Financing Capacity The New Housing Market and its Effect on Infrastructure Financing Capacity Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. NIFR 2009 November 6, 2009 1 Presentation Overview Housing Market Trends New Home Pricing Trends

More information

The Financial Accounting Standards Board

The Financial Accounting Standards Board V A L U A T I O N How the New Leases Standard May Impact Business Valuations By Judith H. O Dell, CPA, CVA The Financial Accounting Standards Board issued the 485 page Leases Standard (Topic 842) in February,

More information

File Reference No Re: Proposed Accounting Standards Update, Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements

File Reference No Re: Proposed Accounting Standards Update, Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements Deloitte & Touche LLP 695 East Main Street Stamford, CT 06901-2141 Tel: + 1 203 708 4000 Fax: + 1 203 708 4797 www.deloitte.com Ms. Susan M. Cosper Technical Director Financial Accounting Standards Board

More information

FASB Emerging Issues Task Force. Issue No Title: Accounting by Lessees for Maintenance Deposits under Lease Arrangements

FASB Emerging Issues Task Force. Issue No Title: Accounting by Lessees for Maintenance Deposits under Lease Arrangements EITF Issue No. 08-3 FASB Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 08-3 Title: Accounting by Lessees for Maintenance Deposits under Lease Arrangements Document: Issue Summary No. 1, Supplement No. 1 Date prepared:

More information

TOWN OF PAYSON DEVELOPMENT FEE STUDY LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN, AND DEVELOPMENT FEE REPORT

TOWN OF PAYSON DEVELOPMENT FEE STUDY LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN, AND DEVELOPMENT FEE REPORT TOWN OF PAYSON DEVELOPMENT FEE STUDY LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN, AND DEVELOPMENT FEE REPORT Prepared for: May 15, 2014 4701 Sangamore Road, Suite S240 Bethesda, MD 301.320.6900

More information

The joint leases project change is coming

The joint leases project change is coming No. 2010-4 18 June 2010 Technical Line Technical guidance on standards and practice issues The joint leases project change is coming What you need to know The proposed changes to the accounting for leases

More information

Table 1: Maximum Allowable PIFs Under Industry Standard Calculation Methods (3/4" Connection Size)

Table 1: Maximum Allowable PIFs Under Industry Standard Calculation Methods (3/4 Connection Size) MEMO To: From: Chris Matkins, General Manager, South Fort Collins Sanitation District John Wright, Project Manager Rick Giardina, Project Director Date: Re: Plant Investment Fee Technical Memorandum I.

More information

Leases make their way onto the balance sheet

Leases make their way onto the balance sheet February 2016 IFRS Practical Matters France Leases make their way onto the balance sheet Navigating the journey for a smooth landing What you need to know The IASB issued a new standard for leases that

More information

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT: Our website is changing! Please click here for details.

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT: Our website is changing! Please click here for details. IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT: Our website is changing! Please click here for details. Home Search Downloads Exemptions Agriculture Maps Tangible Links Contact Home Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Frequently

More information

A TDR Program for Naples. May 11, 2007

A TDR Program for Naples. May 11, 2007 ATTACHMENT G A TDR Program for Naples May 11, 2007 Introduction This paper is intended to supplement and expand upon the Draft TDR Program Framework authored by Solimar in February 2007. 1 The Framework

More information

Project Economics: The Value of Leasing. Russell Banham, Savills

Project Economics: The Value of Leasing. Russell Banham, Savills ICSC European Retail Property School Project Economics: The Value of Leasing Russell Banham, Savills (Investment, Development & Asset Management) Introduction Who I am Russell Banham Over 30 years of experience

More information

EITF Issue No EITF Issue No Working Group Report No. 1, p. 1

EITF Issue No EITF Issue No Working Group Report No. 1, p. 1 EITF Issue No. 03-9 The views in this report are not Generally Accepted Accounting Principles until a consensus is reached and it is FASB Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 03-9 Title: Interaction of

More information

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2017 SESSION LAW HOUSE BILL 436

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2017 SESSION LAW HOUSE BILL 436 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2017 SESSION LAW 2017-138 HOUSE BILL 436 AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR UNIFORM AUTHORITY TO IMPLEMENT SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT FEES FOR PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER SYSTEMS IN NORTH

More information

3. FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 29

3. FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 29 3. FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 29 The purpose of fiscal impact analysis is to estimate the impact of a development or a land use change on the budgets of governmental units serving the

More information

RE: Recommendations for Reforming Inclusionary Housing Policy

RE: Recommendations for Reforming Inclusionary Housing Policy Circulate San Diego 1111 6th Avenue, Suite 402 San Diego, CA 92101 Tel: 619-544-9255 Fax: 619-531-9255 www.circulatesd.org September 25, 2018 Chair Georgette Gomez Smart Growth and Land Use Committee City

More information

REAL ESTATE PERSPECTIVE ON NEW LEASE ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

REAL ESTATE PERSPECTIVE ON NEW LEASE ACCOUNTING STANDARDS VALUATION & ADVISORY REAL ESTATE PERSPECTIVE ON NEW LEASE ACCOUNTING STANDARDS BY JOHN CORBETT, MAI, ASA, FRICS AND MARC R. SHAPIRO, MAI, MRICS INTRODUCTION The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)

More information

CITY OF MEDFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BUILDABLE LAND INVENTORY

CITY OF MEDFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BUILDABLE LAND INVENTORY CITY OF MEDFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PREPARED BY CITY OF MEDFORD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 200 SOUTH IVY STREET MEDFORD, OREGON 97501 BIANCA PETROU, A.I.C.P., ACTING PLANNING DIRECTOR LONG RANGE PLANNING SECTION

More information

THE CHAIRPERSON. Hans Hoogervorst Chairman International Accounting Standard Board 30 Cannon Street London EC4M 6XH.

THE CHAIRPERSON. Hans Hoogervorst Chairman International Accounting Standard Board 30 Cannon Street London EC4M 6XH. Floor 18 Tower 42 25 Old Broad Street London EC2N 1HQ United Kingdom t +44 (0)20 7382 1770 f +44 (0)20 7382 1771 www.eba.europa.eu THE CHAIRPERSON +44(0)20 7382 1765 direct andrea.enria@eba.europa.eu Hans

More information

CHAPTER CAPITAL FACILITIES, FEES, AND INCENTIVES RELATED TO FEES. B. Fire Combat and Rescue Service Impact Fee Study and Modifications

CHAPTER CAPITAL FACILITIES, FEES, AND INCENTIVES RELATED TO FEES. B. Fire Combat and Rescue Service Impact Fee Study and Modifications CHAPTER 1300. CAPITAL FACILITIES, FEES, AND INCENTIVES RELATED TO FEES SECTION 1302. IMPACT FEES 1302.6. Fire Combat and Rescue Service Impact Fees A. Intent and Purpose 1. To establish uniform fire combat

More information

Economic Impacts of MLS Home Sales and Purchases in Canada and the Provinces

Economic Impacts of MLS Home Sales and Purchases in Canada and the Provinces Economic Impacts of MLS Home Sales and Purchases in Canada and the Provinces 2006 2008 FINAL REPORT April 24, 2009 Economic Impacts of MLS Home Sales and Purchases in Canada and the Provinces 2006-2008

More information

4.13 Population and Housing

4.13 Population and Housing Environmental Impact Analysis Population and Housing 4.13 Population and Housing 4.13.1 Setting This section evaluates the impacts to the regional housing supply and population growth associated with implementation

More information

City of Los Angeles CALIFORNIA. O Kji ERIC GARCETTI MAYOR ARTS DISTRICT LOS ANGELES BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (PROPERTY BASED)

City of Los Angeles CALIFORNIA. O Kji ERIC GARCETTI MAYOR ARTS DISTRICT LOS ANGELES BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (PROPERTY BASED) HOLLY L. WOLCOTT CITY CLERK SHANNON D. HOPPES EXECUTIVE OFFICER City of Los Angeles CALIFORNIA O Kji m 71 I^ OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK Neighborhood and Business Improvement District Division 200 N. Spring

More information